Scott P. v. Craigslist, Inc. [1]

In February 2010, Scott P., an unnamed plaintiff proceeding anonymously, filed a lawsuit against Craigslist and other defendants in California state court after his co-workers allegedly posted a series of Craiglist ads impersonating him.

The complaint [2] alleges that, in March 2009, co-workers posted a series of ads on the "casual encounters" section of Craigslist pretending to be Scott P. looking for gay sex. Scott P. complained to Craigslist several times asking the site to remove the ads and to prevent future ads impersonating him.  According to the complaint, Craigslist staff removed the ads and assured him that they would "take care of it," which he understood as an undertaking to prevent further harassing posts. 

Despite these communications, a number of additional posts appeared in April 2009.  These ads gave Scott P.'s name, phone number and home address and "invit[ed] people to go to [Scott P.'s] home with friends to pick up large, heavy furniture and items for free or at very low prices." According to the complaint, approximately 50 to 60 people appeared at Scott P.'s home as a result of the ads and "entered onto his real property and demanded the free property advertised on . . . Craigslist."

Scott P. asserted a number of claims against his co-workers and employer over the fake ads, including defamation, false light, intrusion, publication of private facts, and discrimination. With respect to Craigslist, Scott P. asserted a claim for promissory estoppel [3], alleging that he reasonably relied on Craiglist promise that it would prevent future fraudulent postings in his name. (This may be the first case we've seen relying on Barnes v. Yahoo! [4] to get around Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.) Scott P. also asserted a claim for "unfair competition" against Craigslist. 

In March, Scott P. dismissed his employer Foster Farms from the case.

Update:

5/3/2010 - Craigslist filed a demurrer [5] to the complaint.

5/17/2010 - Scott P. filed a response [6]. 

5/25/2010 - Craigslist filed a reply [7]. 

6/2/2010 - The court held a hearing [8] and overruled the demurrer on the promissory estoppel count, holding that the complaint "sufficiently pleaded an agreement supported by promissory estoppel." The court granted a temporary stay of discovery to allow Craigslist to file a writ of petition to the Court of Appeal.